Namek GBE revision/Calc replacement

[Mgebrat282]

Okey so this thread is to replace this calculation Namek size and GBE for this new I made
it was said that Namek's stars are Suns and have our Sun size, but the term "Sun" is used commonly in fiction as just a "star", which we can see on official site several times, like "smaller suns" "bigger suns", etc. So Namek suns are not our Sun and can't have the same size, which makes the current calc irrelevant.
Why Namek's destruction is a GBE? Frieza destroyed only Namek's core and without it Namek blew up by itself.
So for Namek's GBE upgrade:
Namek GBE = 6.5E+44 J or 6.5 Foe(High 4-C, Large Star lvl)

3D KE formula = 4,8506144E+10^43 or 0,485 Foe(High 4-C, Large Star lvl)

 

[Nullflowerblush]

Why Namek's destruction is a GBE? Frieza destroyed only Namek's core and without it Namek blew up by itself.

Right, but he did survive the explosion at what was essentially zero energy and near-death.

Anyway,

So for Namek's GBE upgrade:
Namek GBE = 6.5E+44 J or 6.5 Foe(High 4-C, Large Star lvl)

How exactly did you calculate the GBE? The formula for GBE is (3GM^2/5R). Your GBE should be 9.1271e+40 joules.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Wait hold up

Because it literally has to be, what you said is true, but only in part, it's why the calc hinges on panels when all 3 suns drawn, as opposed to one or even two. If all 3 suns are visible, then one must be parallel to Namek, or in the foreground, based on how Namek's day-night cycle works, which is that it doesn't, Namek is situated between the 3 suns, like a triangle, casting light onto the planet at all angles making it so Namek doesn't have a night.

That's not true at all. We have literal IRL examples of a triple star system that's estimated to have planets. One of which more or less exactly mimics what Namek would look like. Why would we ever assume Namek is star-sized when it's completely realistic for this form of star system to exist? There's no reason at all for it to be this big.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Right, but he did survive the explosion at what was essentially zero energy and near-death.

I know

How exactly did you calculate the GBE? The formula for GBE is (3GM^2/5R). Your GBE should be 9.1271e+40 joules.

I just calced its destruction in DBZ Kakarot which looks indentical to manga, where we don't have the timeframe, so using this moment in game is logical. And I added it to Namek's GBE as it exploded on itself without its core, not that it was blown up by someone.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Wait hold up

That's not true at all. We have literal IRL examples of a triple star system that's estimated to have planets. One of which more or less exactly mimics what Namek would look like. Why would we ever assume Namek is star-sized when it's completely realistic for this form of star system to exist? There's no reason at all for it to be this big.

You see, in official website we it's been shown that Namek's star system is not something you can see in real world. Namek isn't circling its suns, but suns are cyrcling it like our moon around the Earth. In manga we see that Namek is bigger than its suns and it should be because it litteraly holds them by its gbe.

 

[Nullflowerblush]

in official website we it's been shown that Namek's star system is not something you can see in real world. Namek isn't circling its suns, but suns are cyrcling it like our moon around the Earth.

Dude, those astronomy experts didn't write the series.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Dude, those astronomy experts didn't write the series.

Okay, but that thing was shown in manga. Namek is bigger than its stars and they are cyrcling it. There is no such thing in our universe

 

[Nullflowerblush]

Have you ever heard of perspective? Foreground and background? Distance from the point of view? Why is it that "Namek is bigger than its suns" based off of low-detail outer space exterior long shots and not "The suns appear smaller because they are farther away from the point of view than Namek is"?

 

[Nullflowerblush]

Like, I dunno. Using the image in your calculation, if we're to assume the sun used as a reference and Namek are parallel as the calculation does, then the sun is 65 pixels away from the planet itself, which is only 217,100 km. For comparison, the distance between Earth and its moon is 384,399 km. Namek's atmosphere is explicitly similar enough to Earth's that even normal humans like Bulma can exist comfortably within its climate, and the planet is probably more water by volume than Earth is, so I don't think the planet has three full-sized stars orbiting around its surface at a distance only slightly greater than the diameter of the stars themselves.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Have you ever heard of perspective? Foreground and background? Distance from the point of view? Why is it that "Namek is bigger than its suns" based off of low-detail outer space exterior long shots and not "The suns appear smaller because they are farther away from the point of view than Namek is"?

Umm...if you take a look at any image of Namek with its suns, it's always bigger than stars, no matter what. I doubt it's only in perspective and point of view.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Like, I dunno. Using the image in your calculation, if we're to assume the sun used as a reference and Namek are parallel as the calculation does, then the sun is 65 pixels away from the planet itself, which is only 217,100 km. For comparison, the distance between Earth and its moon is 384,399 km. Namek's atmosphere is explicitly similar enough to Earth's that even normal humans like Bulma can exist comfortably within its climate, and the planet is probably more water by volume than Earth is, so I don't think the planet has three full-sized stars orbiting around its surface at a distance only slightly greater than the diameter of the stars themselves.

I'm not using sun as a reference, instead I'm using the smallest star in our universe, so it would be more logicall

 

[Qawsedf234]

I'm not using sun as a reference, instead I'm using the smallest star in our universe, so it would be more logicall

This assumption isn't logical. At the size suggested Namek's core should collapse into a Proto-star and the other sun would've be drawn to the planet. Mercury is nearly 60 million kilometers away from the Sun, which is 267x the distance between the distance called.

All the assumptions presented just don't make sense. I even showed a IRL star system that could mimic Namek pretty closely. I don't think this calc is valid.

 

[Mgebrat282]

This assumption isn't logical. At the size suggested Namek's core should collapse into a Proto-star and the other sun would've be drawn to the planet. Mercury is nearly 60 million kilometers away from the Sun, which is 267x the distance between the distance called.

All the assumptions presented just don't make sense. I even showed a IRL star system that could mimic Namek pretty closely. I don't think this calc is valid.

Using IRL star systems is irrelevant, because they don't work that way. Stars are sycrling Namek, which means they are bounded by its GBE, which we see in manga and anime. Also how it's shown in official website:

 

[Qawsedf234]

Also how it's shown in official website:

You missed the image I showed for KOI-5. The NASA triple star diagram was to show an article explaining how's it's functionally possible. Namek orbiting a star and then having the right perceptive on the other two would fulfill everything the story needs.

 

[Mgebrat282]

You missed the image I showed for KOI-5. The NASA triple star diagram was to show an article explaining how's it's functionally possible. Namek orbiting a star and then having the right perceptive on the other two would fulfill everything the story needs.

Let's slow down for a bit. You don't agree with calc itself because the size of Namek isn't right, right?
Btw, Namek has 3 suns and THEY are orbiting it, not Namek oribiting them

 

[Qawsedf234]

Btw, Namek has 3 suns and THEY are orbiting it,

This is a presumption based on the stars appearing in the background and lighting Namek up. This doesn't make sense when we have a real life example of a planet with a three stars that would be flanked on all sides at various points in it's orbit.

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

It was accepted here.

 

[Mgebrat282]

This is a presumption based on the stars appearing in the background and lighting Namek up. This doesn't make sense when we have a real life example of a planet with a three stars that would be flanked on all sides at various points in it's orbit.

First: You didn't answer my question
Second: Why do you assume that the star system of Nemean works like in the real world, when it has never been shown to do so? On the contrary, in the manga, Namek is always shown to be larger than its stars, and that they revolve around it, which is why there is no night on Namek. If it were to revolve around them, then there would be night. This is also stated on the official website.

 

[Mgebrat282]

It was accepted here.

Absolutly. But there they assume Namek's stars are suns, which I disagree(read the calc and blog). What do you think about Namek's GBE I gave from its explosion?

 

[Qawsedf234]

And I disagree with it's assumptions. Like it being accepted in a CRT does not mean it can never be challenged or overturned.

First: You didn't answer my question

I disagree with the calc because the core assumptions don't make sense to me. The size is a seperate issue in addition to that one.

Namek is always shown to be larger than its stars, and that they revolve around it, which is why there is no night on Namek.

This can be accomplished with the KOI-5 system that I've shown. It being shown larger because its the focus point is a common perceptive thing. It's why the Earth appears larger than the Sun while on the Moon.

This is also stated on the official website

Both links are pixel calcs. What official statement are you talking about?

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

And I disagree with it's assumptions. Like it being accepted in a CRT does not mean it can never be challenged or overturned.

You'd have to overturn it in your own CRT rather than a CG thread with none of the original lads who argued for it.

 

[Mgebrat282]

I disagree with the calc because the core assumptions don't make sense to me. The size is a seperate issue in addition to that one.

Why it doesn't make sense? The planet blew up by itself without the core, so the only thing that detonated it was its own GBE that couldn't been controled without the core

This can be accomplished with the KOI-5 system that I've shown. It being shown larger because its the focus point is a common perceptive thing. It's why the Earth appears larger than the Sun while on the Moon.

I've shown several scans that show Namek and its stars from 3rd pov and stars are smaller no matter what. We know that stars are from all directions from Namek and from some point of view one star should be closer the the viewer than Namek. Even with KOI-5 system, where planet shouldn't be seen because KOI-05 A and B are even bigger than our Sun.

Both links are pixel calcs. What official statement are you talking about?

"which we can see on official site several times, like "smaller suns" "bigger suns", etc. So Namek suns are not our Sun and can't have the same size, which makes the current calc irrelevant."

 

[Nullflowerblush]

First: You didn't answer my question
Second: Why do you assume that the star system of Nemean works like in the real world, when it has never been shown to do so? On the contrary, in the manga, Namek is always shown to be larger than its stars, and that they revolve around it, which is why there is no night on Namek. If it were to revolve around them, then there would be night. This is also stated on the official website.

Again, perspective.

 

[Mgebrat282]

Again, perspective.

First: Prove it. We never saw Namek being smaller than its stars no matter what and even those povs are kinda in reality shown. Like on the second one one of stars is closer to viewer than Namek.
Second: Then what size Namek is by your opinion?

 

[Nullflowerblush]

We never saw Namek being smaller than its stars no matter what

Sure. Give me the one shot from a point of view behind one of Namek's suns, then.

Second: Then what size Namek is by your opinion?

In my opinion? 455,820.325 km.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

Wait hold up

That's not true at all. We have literal IRL examples of a triple star system that's estimated to have planets. One of which more or less exactly mimics what Namek would look like. Why would we ever assume Namek is star-sized when it's completely realistic for this form of star system to exist? There's no reason at all for it to be this big.

This was accepted in a thread long time ago. If I wasn't banned at the time, I would've brought this up.

 

[GodlyCharmander]

First: You didn't answer my question
Second: Why do you assume that the star system of Nemean works like in the real world, when it has never been shown to do so? On the contrary, in the manga, Namek is always shown to be larger than its stars, and that they revolve around it, which is why there is no night on Namek. If it were to revolve around them, then there would be night. This is also stated on the official website.

I'm pretty sure Dragon Ball Kakarot proves those are planets, not suns.

 

[Planck69]

I'm sorry, is this thread implying that Namek is larger than the Sun because of a perspective shot from outer space? If so, that is completely asinine.

 

[Saqphire]

Wait hold up

That's not true at all. We have literal IRL examples of a triple star system that's estimated to have planets. One of which more or less exactly mimics what Namek would look like. Why would we ever assume Namek is star-sized when it's completely realistic for this form of star system to exist? There's no reason at all for it to be this big.

Have you ever heard of perspective? Foreground and background? Distance from the point of view? Why is it that "Namek is bigger than its suns" based off of low-detail outer space exterior long shots and not "The suns appear smaller because they are farther away from the point of view than Namek is"?

Disagree for these reasons. Also the og calc should be nuked

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

You'd have to overturn it in your own CRT rather than a CG thread with none of the original lads who argued for it.

It wouldn't even be hard. Think Chariot was its main defender and he's been real inactive these days.

 

[Qawsedf234]

"which we can see on official site several times, like "smaller suns" "bigger suns", etc. So Namek suns are not our Sun and can't have the same size, which makes the current calc irrelevant

Dude your source literally has the scientist say that Namek has the same mass and gravity as the Earth

Sekine: Oh, their landscapes ARE really similar. And since Gohan, Krillin, and the others were able to walk normally on its surface, the gravity on the planet must be about the same as Earth's, too. Having the same gravitational pull means that the masses of the planets must be about the same.

Sekine: Well, since there's water and the gravity there is about the same as Earth's, I'd say that a human could at least take a short trip there and be fine.

Like your source bar for bar contradicts your claim.

 

[Huesito88]

It wouldn't even be hard. Think Chariot was its main defender and he's been real inactive these days.

That's because he disowned DBZ a while back

 

[Mgebrat282]

I'm pretty sure Dragon Ball Kakarot proves those are planets, not suns.

No, it says those are stars, I can show scans if you want(I have the game)

 

[Mgebrat282]

I'm sorry, is this thread implying that Namek is larger than the Sun because of a perspective shot from outer space? If so, that is completely asinine.

Namek isn't bigger than the Sun, but was consistenly shown to be bigger than its own stars. Prove that it's only a perspective

 

[Mgebrat282]

Dude your source literally has the scientist say that Namek has the same mass and gravity as the Earth

Bruh, it says Namek is bigger than Earth
"Planets that orbit stars other than the sun are called "exoplanets". But the exoplanets that have been discovered so far are usually larger than Earth with several times the density and gravitational pull of Earth. Exoplanets with masses several time larger than Earth's are called "Super-Earths", which makes it sound like something you'd find in Dragon Ball actually, kind of like a Super Saiyan.

If we get right down to it, planets the size of ours are rather unimpressive, so it'd be fair to say that Planet Namek is kind of like Earth's big brother since they're so similar."

Like your source bar for bar contradicts your claim.

It's not

 

[Mgebrat282]

Sure. Give me the one shot from a point of view behind one of Namek's suns, then.

Do these count?

 

[Qawsedf234]

Bruh, it says Namek is bigger than Earth

The scientist states twice that Namek has similar mass and gravity to Earth. Even in the exo-planet section they say Namek is bigger than Earth, but not star dwarfing. The evidence you presented does not back you claim in any capacity, it in fact goes against it since they directly say Namek is Earth-like in mass and gravity.

 

[Mgebrat282]

The scientist states twice that Namek has similar mass and gravity to Earth. Even in the exo-planet section they say Namek is bigger than Earth, but not star dwarfing. The evidence you presented does not back you claim in any capacity, it in fact goes against it since they directly say Namek is Earth-like in mass and gravity.

He said about Namek being similar to Earth BEFORE saying it's bigger than Earth, so the later statement is more logical

 

[Qawsedf234]

He said about Namek being similar to Earth BEFORE saying it's bigger than Earth, so the later statement is more logical

He says the Namek is Earrh sized after the exo-planet statement as well:

Sekine: Well, since there's water and the gravity there is about the same as Earth's, I'd say that a human could at least take a short trip there and be fine.

So he maintains that Namek is Earth-like but potentially bigger

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

He says the Namek is Earrh sized after the exo-planet statement as well:

So he maintains that Namek is Earth-like but potentially bigger

Bulma was on the planet, we don't have to rely on some third party statement to say humans can live on Namek lol